Summary
The child abduction proceedings were initiated by the father on 14th December 2007.
The parties began their relationship in late 1999, and they lived in France.
The mother was British. The father was French.
The children were wrongfully removed from France in November 2007.
The father sought the return of the children to France.
Mr Justice Ryder made a return order, stating that the children should be returned to France. He held:
“19 The French judiciary have responded to mother's application; indeed her case was upheld by them, at least until she unlawfully removed the children. There were no apparent representational or linguistic difficulties until she chose to leave the jurisdiction and failed to appear before the French judge last November. The welfare report to which I have alluded is detailed and even handed in its condemnation, as are the French court's judgments. There is simply nothing sufficient to permit this court to interfere with the French process. Comity and respect for the policy of the Convention obliges this court, which is a harsh jurisdiction, I readily accept, unless there is the most persuasive compelling evidence to the contrary, to determine that the French courts are just as capable of fairly investigating and adjudicating on the competing claims of the parties. The mother's assertions as to the question of fairness of any proceedings in France cannot therefore be an Article 13(b) defence.
20 In all the circumstances, I hold that the Article 13(b) exception is not established and accordingly there must be an order for the return of both of the children to the jurisdiction of the Republic of France.” [19-20].